Competing Concerns in Efforts to Reduce Criminal Legal Contact Among People with Serious Mental Illnesses: Findings from a Multi-City Study on Misdemeanor Arrests.

People with serious mental illnesses are disproportionately involved in the criminal legal system, often for low-level, non-violent misdemeanors. This paper examines how decision-makers at different stages of the criminal legal system articulate unique visions of the "best approach" for addressing this problem of over-representation. Focus groups and in-depth interviews were conducted with 94 stakeholders from Atlanta, Chicago, New York City, and Philadelphia to understand how decision-makers from different agencies use and process specific misdemeanor charges in relation to people with serious mental illnesses. Data were analyzed using a thematic approach. The data reveal a series of tensions regarding how criminal legal system stakeholders process people with serious mental illnesses through the misdemeanor system. Three key themes emerged from analysis. The first characterizes the shared commitment across agencies to reducing system contact among people with mental illnesses. The second explores how agencies differ on how to make good on that commitment because of the distinct values and goals they bring to the table. The final theme explores the limits of current approaches to reducing system contact for people with mental illnesses. Findings are discussed in the context of literature on "loose coupling" and the focal concerns framework and demonstrate that decisions about how and when to intervene with people with mental illnesses in the criminal legal system are influenced by the varying orientations, goals, and values of stakeholder agencies. Understanding these core differences is a critical step toward value alignment in strategies to reduce system involvement among people with mental illnesses.

Crisis Response Model Preferences of Mental Health Care Clients With Prior Misdemeanor Arrests and of Their Family and Friends.

The overrepresentation of people with serious mental illnesses in the criminal legal system has spurred the development of crisis response models to improve or reduce police response to a mental health crisis. However, limited research has explored preferences for crisis response, and no research in the United States has examined the responses desired by mental health care clients or their family members. This study aimed to understand the experiences of people with serious mental illnesses interacting with police and to learn about their preferences for crisis response models. The authors interviewed 50 clients with serious mental illnesses and a history of arrest who were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of a police-mental health linkage system, as well as 18 of their family members and friends. Data were coded with deductive and inductive approaches and were grouped into larger themes. Clients and family or friends described needing a calm environment and empathy during a crisis. They selected a nonpolice response as their first choice and response from a crisis intervention team as their last choice among four options, highlighting the importance of trained responders and past negative interactions with police. However, they also noted concerns about safety and the shortcomings of a nonpolice response. These findings build understanding about clients' and family members' preferences for crisis response and highlight concerns that are relevant for policy makers.

Contexts shaping misdemeanor system interventions among people with mental illnesses: qualitative findings from a multi-site system mapping exercise.

BACKGROUND: People with mental illnesses are disproportionately entangled in the criminal legal system. Historically, this involvement has resulted from minor offending, often accompanied by misdemeanor charges. In recent years, policymakers have worked to reduce the footprint of the criminal legal system. This paper seeks to better understand how misdemeanor systems intervene in the lives of people with mental illnesses. METHODS: System mapping exercises were conducted with misdemeanor system stakeholders from the jurisdictions of Atlanta, Chicago, Manhattan, and Philadelphia. Narrative detail on decision-making and case processing, both generally and in relation to specific types of behavior, including trespassing, retail theft/shoplifting, and simple assault, were coded and analyzed for thematic patterns. Based on the qualitative analysis, this paper offers a conceptual diagram of contexts shaping misdemeanor system interventions among people with mental illnesses. RESULTS: All four sites have been engaged in efforts to reduce the use of misdemeanor charges both generally and in relation to people with mental illnesses. Decision-makers across all sites experience contexts that shape how, when, and where they intervene, which are: (1) law and policy environments; (2) location of the behavior; (3) expectations of stakeholders; (4) knowledge of mental illnesses; and (5) access to community resources. Law and policy environments expand or constrain opportunities for diversion. The location of offending is relevant to who has a stake in the behavior, and what demands they have. Clinical, experiential, and system-level knowledge of mental illnesses inform a chain of decisions about what to do. The capacity to address mental health needs is contingent on access to social services, including housing. CONCLUSION: People making decisions along the criminal legal continuum are critical to illuminating the dynamic, inter-related contexts that facilitate and frustrate attempts to address defendants' mental health needs while balancing considerations of public safety. Multi-sector, scenario-based or case study exercises could help identify concrete ways of improving each of the contexts that surround whole-of-system decisions.

Information sharing across mental health service providers and criminal legal system stakeholders: Perspectives of people with serious mental illnesses and their family members.

OBJECTIVE: The overrepresentation of people with serious mental illnesses in the criminal legal system has spurred information-sharing initiatives to transmit information between mental health service providers and criminal legal system stakeholders with the goal of improving resources and streamlining access to care. However, no research to date has examined the perspectives of people with mental illnesses who have their information shared across these systems or the perspectives of their family members. This study examined the perspectives on mental health-criminal legal system information sharing among people with serious mental illnesses and a history of arrest, as well as their family members. METHODS: Researchers interviewed 24 clients with serious mental illnesses and a history of arrest who are enrolled in a randomized, controlled trial of a police-mental health Linkage System as well as 11 of their family members. Participants were recruited and interviewed between November 2020 and February 2021. A thematic analysis was used to code and analyze all interview transcripts. RESULTS: Study participants articulated perceived benefits and concerns around cross-system information sharing. There was strong support for information sharing in both directions, with the anticipation that such information sharing can prevent unnecessary arrest and/or incarceration, promote positive and safe interactions with criminal legal system professionals, and foster greater understanding and access to treatment. Concerns were more limited and largely related to perceived stigma around mental illnesses and the potential consequences of such stigma. CONCLUSIONS: While concerns about information sharing should be considered, study participants overwhelmingly perceived the sharing of information between mental health providers and criminal legal stakeholders as a positive intervention. Such perspectives can be understood as a pragmatic choice in the face of criminal legal system contact and additional research could guide programmatic and policy changes.